Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck

It is with extreme sorrow that I take upon myself the heavy burden of imparting the irreversibly sad news that Dr Jung is no longer with us...
It has been rumoured that he was a great admirer of Dr Goebbels aka the Ogilvy of pre-war advertising (or is it the other way round?).

As Detlof & another (old) teacher of mine both noted, Asa's two facets (dark & light) coexist usually as sides of the same coin.
The old teacher maintained that this situation is a dynamic paradox and will ineluctibly lead to one of the two taking precedence over the other. In his opinion, the devil is frustration, i.e., the force of destruction/negation. The "angel" is the mark of sublimation, the force of creation.
It seems Jung was fascinated by the Nazi (or maybe Mr Goebbels') ability to manipulate and focus collective negative energy. Deus ex machina, and then some.

So many things "seem". I suspect that Detlof *knows* a thing or two -- from experience & otherwise..

p.s. Pls don't mistake my comment as a judgement on other posters. My knowledge on this & many other subjects, ex post & ante, is insufficient to judge the posters above -- but it is enough to acknowledge my ignorance!

Gregm, nice stuff.

But, light/dark is still a dualistic perspective. If you see dark as separate from light - assume that that is the last truth - then that will be the truth for you (reality, again, is very accomodating that way...). Beyond ying/yang, light/dark, order/dis-order is Light; Shiva the creator/destroyer arises from the ground of what is. Don't get lost in manifestation (says Lao Tzu way, way before me). If you believe Light is separated into light/dark in its most fundamental nature, then you will invariably move towards the dark, because, that perspective's recoil from the Light is ITSELF the dark.

I liked your point that Jung might have been pulled towards a tacit collaboration with totalitarianism out of his "fascination" with the dark. I would suggest that this was his karmic path given his assumption of dark/light as the primary focus and assumptive perception. Then, given his trans-cognitive peak sight, then coupled with the alleged attachment to darkness (power of perception coupled with narcissism - remember the attachment to darkeness outside is reflective of attachment to darkness inside) AND the rise of the zenith of totalitarian nation-states as the collective swirling about him, is such a pulling attraction not understandable? He got pulled back towards the Matrix in his fascination for it. But it was a mirror...

What do you think, detlof? i'm way out there now, aren't I?!! Help, throw me a lifevest!!

No, It is not a mirror...

The light/dark is a mirror; that beneath it is not.

Beneath is not.